Re: [RFC] Add BPF_PROG_TYPE_CGROUP_IOCTL

[Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>]

Hello,

On Fri, May 07, 2021 at 06:54:13PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> All I meant is that for the container/cgroups world starting out with
> time-sharing feels like the best fit, least because your SRIOV designers
> also seem to think that's the best first cut for cloud-y computing.
> Whether it's virtualized or containerized is a distinction that's getting
> ever more blurry, with virtualization become a lot more dynamic and
> container runtimes als possibly using hw virtualization underneath.

FWIW, I'm completely on the same boat. There are two fundamental issues with
hardware-mask based control - control granularity and work conservation.
Combined, they make it a significantly more difficult interface to use which
requires hardware-specific tuning rather than simply being able to say "I
wanna prioritize this job twice over that one".

My knoweldge of gpus is really limited but my understanding is also that the
gpu cores and threads aren't as homogeneous as the CPU counterparts across
the vendors, product generations and possibly even within a single chip,
which makes the problem even worse.

Given that GPUs are time-shareable to begin with, the most universal
solution seems pretty clear.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun